On 13 February 2013 16:32, Alec Teal <a.t...@warwick.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 13/02/13 16:11, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>
>> On 13 February 2013 15:33, Alec Teal wrote:
>>>
>>> A few questions, what is this stage 1? (link to documentation please, or
>>> a
>>> descriptive answer).
>>
>> See http://gcc.gnu.org/develop.html
>>
>>
>>> for the choice of file extension, this is really a tiny thing, but I do
>>> have
>>> a reason for .cpp
>>>
>>> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1545080/correct-c-code-file-extension-cc-vs-cpp
>>> So I have done some research :P
>>
>> Your reason is a question closed as unconstructive, where the top
>> answers say it doesn't matter? Why does that support .cpp?
>>
>> How about using .cc because the existing C++ code in GCC already uses .cc
>>
> How about scrolling down? It is such a small issue there is no definitive
> answer, the compiler doesn't care, but there is some debate on that page.
I read it. That's not debate, just ill-informed speculation ("cpp is
the recommended extension for C++ as far as I know"). We already have
C++ code in GCC, the runtime library uses .cc and the G++ testsuite
uses .C, adding .cpp as a third choice based on the opinions in that
page or your feeling of unease doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
